“It could be argued that Microsoft’s unethical Technology Evangelism (TE) practices are “old news”—i.e., that Microsoft stopped using these questionable TE practices long ago. This is very unlikely to be the case, for at least three reasons.”

“It’s like you’re going out with a girl; forgive me, it goes the other way also. You’re going out with a girl, what you really want to do is have a deep, close and intimate relationship, at least for one night. And, you know, you just can’t let her feel like that, because if you do, it ain’t going to happen, right. So you have to talk long term and white picket fence and all these other wonderful things, or else you’re never going to get what you’re really looking for.” –James Plamondon, Lead Microsoft Evangelist

You hardly noticed his activities because they mostly cover Ukraine and Russia. Microsoft is quite evil in developing countries of former USSR, and it would be great to read more about this at boycottnovell.

Can you add any publications regarding the trouble MS evangelists are causing in Russia/Ukraine against the goverment order to deploy FOSS in the schools there? What was once a straight forward task has run into quite a bit of difficulty.

Actually, what these MS shills (for a better word) do, by posting comments here without first identifying themselves is illegal. However, many of us know that the gov is not going do anything to protect the public from monopolistic abusers that have corrupted the system.

Quote from the link;
“The Federal Trade Commission yesterday said that companies engaging in word-of-mouth marketing, in which people are compensated to promote products to their peers, must disclose those relationships.Word-of-mouth marketing can take any form of peer-to-peer communication, such as a post on a Web blog, a MySpace.com page for a movie character, or the comments of a stranger on a bus.”

NY AG: Facelift firm placed bogus online reviews

The online journal gave a chatty account of a problem-free face lift. “You will never regret it,” the patient wrote.

But the seemingly satisfied customer actually was an employee of the firm behind the Lifestyle Lift, writing as part of a company campaign to plant plugs for the procedure online, state Attorney General Andrew Cuomo said in announcing a $300,000 settlement with the company Tuesday.

His office said the settlement appeared to be one of the first to address so-called astroturf marketing, or creating a bogus grassroots buzz about a product.

Roy,
Thats a nice link, so its seems its illegal as well at the state level (at least in NY) in the USA. There is also a newer link for the FTC in which they are, or have, strengthened the law. While most likely a waste of time going after the MS for it’s Shillers that do not post disclaimers in advance, still, I have to wonder, if this would not be a good project for someone, to file legal complaints. Its might also be a good subject material, I know you have done some on what is illegal in the EU.

Still $300k while small is less they can spend elsewhere doing damage. Most likely, M$ is more embarrassed every time one of its paid shills get caught pretending to be the “average” computer user. Mr. Wong comes to mind as an example of someone not posting a disclaimer. The public still by and large, does not yet believe that M$ is capable of this type of “illegal” behavior. Which is where work like yours and PJ, help to educate us.

Sunday, March 20, the San Jose Mercury News published a front page article on the agent provocatour, alias, Steve Barkto. The article quotes William Zachmann as saying he tracked down Mr. “Barkto” on his Compuserve forum, after this new member made disparaging remarks about IBM, and in particular, OS/2.

Mr. “Barkto” is not a major customer of IBM, but an employee or agent of Microsoft. The account which this mole used, was paid for by the good old folks at MS.

I wrote an letter to Congressman Norm Mineta (D-San Jose) asking that the U.S. Dept. of Justice look into unfair trade practices of MS. In particular, the relationship between computer system manufactures, and MS.

I wonder how many messages we get on this USENET and others, that originate from the corporate headquarters of Microsoft?

I’m a .NET developer/consultant, and leader of a .NET User Group. There is nothing sinister about Microsoft Technical Evangelists. Of course they are strong advocates for their products – duh. That’s how business works – you have people in marketing and sales who convince you that their product is better than the competition’s. Microsoft sells a product that is technical in nature, so they have technical experts who share their expertise and help us understand how their product best serves business (in their opinion).

We all know that there are pros and cons to any product we buy or sell. Microsoft makes a good product when you consider cost, value, and features. Is it for everyone? No, but not everyone can spend the cost of other products on the market. And not everyone wants to take a chance with open source products that may or may not be supported. At the end of the day it amounts to a business decision. There is no black and white answer – it is entirely situational.

What I take greatest offense to is calling consultants for Microsoft shills. In many cases Microsoft products make the most business sense. In the cases where it doesn’t have a clear advantage I don’t “shill” for Microsoft – as you put it.

It’s easy to sit on your ivory tower at the age of 22 pursuing your Ph.D while mocking others engaged in actual business. It’s quite another thing to get out there into the free market and make a living. I invite you to do that at any time. But it looks to me like you are more comfortable with the stability of academia – not the risks associated with the free market.

I’ve been publicly against Microsoft when it comes to their politics (you’ve pointed out their army of lobbyists in another blog) so there are many areas where my path and Microsoft’s diverge. But when it comes to business, they are really a good company to align with.

You don’t see IBM out there supporting the developer community. In fact, I know of no other company as supportive as they are in the IT community. If IBM wants to talk to me about their products I will gladly listen. However, IBM is all about commoditization of services. IBM doesn’t want to build a “developer ecosystem” like Microsoft has done because IBM sees other developers as competition. Microsoft sees us as partners. Big difference.

I think other companies should learn from Microsoft TEs. Their participation in the IT community is a good thing. If Microsoft wanted to be a TRUE MONOPOLY they would act just like IBM and put all of their partners out of business.

Roy L.

123 Reply:July 15th, 2009 at 9:15 pm

I think that Microsoft’s intention is to attract all open source innovations running on top of the Windows system, not the destruction of Microsoft’s competition.

Also, you don’t need to abuse your large market share to be a TRUE MONOPOLY. The qualification for that is to have a large enough market share in one market and be able to use that as unfair leverage into a different market. Being a monopoly isn’t bad, abusing that monopoly leverage to the detriment to other market players is the problem.

Microsoft hasn’t a sense of solidarity and those whom it hires haven’t either. I think this debate is a waste of time.

Jose_X Reply:July 15th, 2009 at 9:55 pm

Thanks for the opinion Roy L.

I think perhaps you made a mistake in assuming that Linux belonged to IBM. [For example, have you taken a look at Red Hat? They grew up alongside Linux contributing to it and servicing it.]

A key point is that Microsoft controls Windows, and by extension, everything that runs on top of this; however, because Linux is open source, those adding value on top work in a much more level playing field and have many more options and opportunities.

>> This time we’re going to talk about the tactics of evangelism. First, the role of ISVs. ISVs— independent software vendors—are pawns in the struggle between platform vendors. … They are very valuable pawns in the struggle, however. We cannot succeed without them. If you’ve ever tried to play chess with only the pieces in the back row, you’ve experienced losing, OK, because you’ve got to have those pawns. They’re essential. So you can’t win without them, and you have to take good care of them. You can’t let them feel like they’re pawns in the struggle. I mean, all through this presentation previously I talked about how you’re using the pawns you’re going to screw them if they don’t do what they want, and da-da-dah. You can’t let them feel like that. If they feel like that, you’ve lost from the beginning. It’s like you’re going out with a girl; forgive me
___________; it goes the other way also. You’re going out with a girl, what you really want to do is have a deep, close and intimate relationship, at least for one night. And, you know, you just can’t let her feel like that, because if you do, it ain’t going to happen, right. So you have to talk long term and white picket fence and all these other wonderful things, or else you’re never going to get what you’re really looking for. So you can’t let them feel like pawns, no matter how much they really are.

“I think perhaps you made a mistake in assuming that Linux belonged to IBM.”

No, I’m not suggesting that. I’m talking about IBM’s partner ecosystem (or lack of). When you look at Microsoft on balance, being in their partner ecosystem is a good thing. Sure there are some ISVs who got burned – but there are many that were bought out and investors who left with wads of money. Everyone can’t be a winner in business. ISVs know the risks they are taking when they develop products that Microsoft may also want to own – but the potential rewards make them do it.

As far as us being “pawns” – we are all pawns. In business you are either using people, or being used. And you just might be using each other. We have nice words for that – ie “partnerships” and “alliances” but in reality we are all pawns being used to accomplish someone else’s goal.

The only thing James Plamondon is guilty of is telling the unvarnished truth about how people use each other. I think he made a political mistake, but he was speaking about the realities of business and perhaps it is us making a mistake by not accepting them as reality.

Am I being used by Microsoft? Absolutely. But I’m also using them. I’m OK with that – and so are they. It’s how business is done – and it is mutually beneficial. Every client that I work for is also using me to accomplish their objectives. That is what I get paid for. They get a ROI on my work, and I feed my kids or buy something that I probably don’t need – and as a result someone else feeds their kids. Welcome to capitalism.

You aren’t going to change a system that is based on greed – a system that requires greed to work. The best you can do is regulate it. I think you see that occuring now in the progressive movement – which I support.

Don’t hate the player – hate the game. All this guy at Microsoft did is wake you up to the rude reality of human behavior. Microsoft doesn’t have a monopoly on this. It’s how business is done in these days.

I was a 22 year old once. I feel what you are saying. But the problem isn’t Microsoft. The problem is greater than Microsoft or any one company. If you want ethics injected back into our society and business leaders with social responsibilities (and I confess, I also want this) then you’ve got to tackle the root problem.

You’ve identified a problem in business, but you haven’t identified a solution. How do you propose to make our society and business just a bit more civil?

Jose_X Reply:July 16th, 2009 at 7:29 pm

Thanks for the honesty, Roy Lawson. One of the things we and others try to point out is that Microsoft has significant advantages over others. They also break the rules to more devastating effects than many others. And I disagree that everyone does business to the degree you describe and similarly to Microsoft.

My main concern is that users and FOSS devs recognize their ability to clean up a twisted log blocking the path and that they keep similar types of logs in the future from creating this same problems this one has created.

We can avoid relying on closed source platforms. This solves many problems. We can also be aware of the deception that is used to get users and partners etc to support Microsoft, frequently thinking one thing but achieving another (that’s where the deception comes in).

Changing the game means participants will adapt. If you want to know how we change the game, we/I are/am telling you one way: drop support for monopolists, especially for those with a long history of exploitation and deception.

Jobs grow when you allow more competition. You also end up with better products for less.

“drop support for monopolists, especially for those with a long history of exploitation and deception.”

The problem isn’t monopolies. The problem is what enables a company to become a monopoly in the first place. If I started developing exclusively on open source platforms today, nothing changes. Well, one thing that changes rather quickly is that my income takes a nose-dive. My wife and kids probably won’t like that.

The issue boils down to a system that is fundamentally unfair – a system where people representing us aren’t really representing us. Not when special interest groups are funding their campaigns and armies of lobbyists are roaming K-Street. I’m sure there is some street in the UK just filled with lobbyists also – you tell me.

Of course, the rich and powerful have always had more access throughout our history. I would be more concerned about that than anything else. That is one of the root factors that have created the problems you see today.

I spend half of my life living and working in the system, and the other half fighting it. But you’ve got to know how to compartmentalize the two (unless you are in academia – which seems to welcome it). It’s a shame that so many people living in democracies are apathetic and so afraid to voice their views in a democracy that their relatives died to protect in battle long ago.

I don’t agree with some of your positions stated here (I still think the partner program on whole is a good thing), but I’m glad you are standing for something. I hope when you are no longer in your 20s you still are fighting the fight. My advice, and you are free to ignore it, is to focus on core problems – not symptoms of core problems. You’ve only got about 80 years on this Earth and you don’t want to spend it fighting a symptom of a problem when you could be fighting the problem itself.

You’re right. Some of the evangelism practices that I taught and executed at Microsoft in the 1990’s were unethical. I didn’t think so at the time — I thought that they were just hyper-competitive — but I agree now.

I am trying to change the error of my ways. I trust that you will agree that even the most hardened sinner can be redeemed.

Maybe you should take a lesson from that.

You wrote:

You’ve only got about 80 years on this Earth…

Make good use of those. There is no second life and there is no karma, but how you are remembered depends mostly on your ethics. When we die (everyone does), we don’t get to take our money with us.

Jose_X Reply:July 16th, 2009 at 11:20 pm

>> The problem isn’t monopolies. The problem is what enables a company to become a monopoly in the first place.

Given the current situation, I think a problem might be what allowed them to become a monopoly but another and very relevant problem is how do we neutralize or break this monopoly.

I could surmise about how I ended up in a jail cell despite being innocent, but a very important problem is getting out of the jail cell.

I did state that by avoiding closed source platforms, we can neutralize monopolies of various types. So I did offer suggestions on not allowing the problem to happen again.

>> If I started developing exclusively on open source platforms today, nothing changes.

Completely disagree, at least if by “I” you are taking yourself to be representative of many developers. If you literally mean just yourself, then you are correct, that would not change much instantaneously. Fortunately, what one person does is usually repeated by many many others even without collaboration.

>> Well, one thing that changes rather quickly is that my income takes a nose-dive.

People that work for Microsoft would also experience that same effect; however, many others would not.

Almost everything you can do on Windows, as a third party developer, in general, you can also do on Linux.

>> My advice, and you are free to ignore it, is to focus on core problems – not symptoms of core problems.

I’ll refer you to the comment above about being stuck in a jail cell.

Another example: if you are losing money daily because of a gambling problem, first get yourself to stop wagering so that you salvage what you have, then work on yourself so that you don’t relapse.

There are cases where you can’t just stop, but if you recognize the problem, you can start to change for the better.

Jose_X Reply:July 16th, 2009 at 11:23 pm

>> Almost everything you can do on Windows, as a third party developer, in general, you can also do on Linux.

And there are certainly things you can do on and with Linux that you can’t do on or with Windows.

Jose_X Reply:July 16th, 2009 at 11:26 pm

>> Almost everything you can do on Windows, as a third party developer, in general, you can also do on Linux.

Linux can be customized tremendously and under your control.

If you cut out the expenses paid towards Microsoft licensing, that leaves the customer with extra money to be spend on your value-add services.

And because Linux is open, you can add types of services that otherwise you could not add were you on Windows in competition with Microsoft.

Jose, you told me that you needed a video and a transcript before you could manage to work out in your head the secret “non-literal interpretation” of Stallman’s comments on “EMACS virgins”. I’ve provided those.

Every single time I asked you about that, you insisted that you needed that video, you had to have that transcript. Now, you’ve got them.

I want to know the non-literal interpretation that you insisted Stallman’s words must have really had, dependent on context, mood, phase of the moon, whatever, which pretty much the entire audience at the keynote somehow failed to grasp, making the grave error of taking his words in their most straightforward sense.

You suggested that having done this might be “character assassination”. That’s a pretty serious charge.

Now, pony up, Jose. I want that “interpretation”, or I want an admission that you’re just dodging the issue. I intend to keep an eye on your comments, and remind you as consistently as I can that you owe me this.

Let’s have it.

Jose_X Reply:July 17th, 2009 at 12:16 am

Where is the link?

Once I see it, I will be better able to confirm your interpretation or else to challenge your interpretation with greater specificity.

Without seeing it or a transcript, I can’t do much more than point out how you might be mistaken.

Since you have been saying things that make someone else whose contributions many people respect look bad, and because I have disagreed with some things you have said in the past, it’s quite natural that you not expect me to take your word at face value.

Oh. My. God. Jose can’t find the link. Roy can’t find the link. Jose manages to reply within minutes to anything that anyone posts in response to him here, so he’s subscribed to the entries he posts in, but somehow he managed to just…not notice the video and transcript I posted this morning.

“…we also have the cult of the virgin of emacs. The virgin of emacs is any female who has not yet learned how to use emacs. And in the church of emacs we believe that taking her emacs virginity away is a blessed act.”

I note that it was a little different at GCDS. “An EMACS virgin is a woman who has not used EMACS. In the Church of EMACS we believe that it is a holy duty to relieve her of her virginity”.

If you ever want to come over to the “dark side” we meet the third Tuesday of every month: http://www.lakelandug.net. I have developed on many platforms, and .NET is by far my favorite. I get paid to do something that I love. It doesn’t get much better than that.

The lunacy of the EPO with its patent maximalism will likely go unchecked (and uncorrected) if Battistelli gets his way and turns the EPO into another SIPO (Croatian in the human rights sense and Chinese in the quality sense)

Another long installment in a multi-part series about UPC at times of post-truth Battistelli-led EPO, which pays the media to repeat the lies and pretend that the UPC is inevitable so as to compel politicians to welcome it regardless of desirability and practicability

Implementing yet more of his terrible ideas and so-called 'reforms', Battistelli seems to be racing to the bottom of everything (patent quality, staff experience, labour rights, working conditions, access to justice etc.)

"Good for trolls" is a good way to sum up the Unitary Patent, which would give litigators plenty of business (defendants and plaintiffs, plus commissions on high claims of damages) if it ever became a reality

Microsoft's continued fascination with and participation in the effort to undermine Alice so as to make software patents, which the company uses to blackmail GNU/Linux vendors, widely acceptable and applicable again